“Possibilities for offshore - PowerPoint Presentation

1. “Possibilities for offshore geodesy”Questions of importance for understanding S.Z. deformation offshore and tools that might be applied to address them.April 15th, 2015

2. Characterizing deformation offshore – necessary for answering questions about anticipated seismogenic portion of plate boundary at Cascadia01234Slip RateDeficit(cm/yr)(Safer and Tobin, 2011)Most/all (?) of the interseismically locked portion of the subduction zone is west of the coast in Cascadia

3. What is the spatial distribution of plate locking behavior – particularly within the shallow portion of the plate interface?Relevant for: Anticipating magnitude and location of future megathrust ruptures and proximity of strong ground shaking near the coast.Identifying possible segment boundaries (see number 1)Characterizing the shallow extent of strong plate locking, and using that to inform models of shallow slipLinking seismicity observations with plate slip behaviorDuring the interseismic period -

4. An example from Alaska -

5. Are there temporal changes in slip behavior within the seismogenic portion of the plate boundary?Is there evidence for transient (aseismic) slip events (during the interseismic period) that are geodetically observable up-dip of the deep frictional transition zone? Up-dip of the locked zone? Accompanied by tremor or earthquakes?Relevant for:Characterizing heterogeneous rheology on the plate interface (Helps to anticipate co-seismic slip behavior as well) Interpretations of seismic observations, or future plans for seismic instrument deployments.During the interseismic period -

6. Example of & premonitory slip in Japan:Kato et al. (2012)

7. How is strain (particularly oblique slip) partitioned and what is the mode of failure within the accretionary prism? Relevant for:Goldfinger et al. (1997)Understanding how the prism is constructed and deformed.Identifying prevalence of elastic versus plastic processes.Relating porous flow and pore pressure conditions through the prism with failure modes on structures.During the interseismic or coseismic period -

8. … and building on potential insight from geodetic AND seismic AND geologic insight:How will the mechanical/frictional properties of the prism (particularly shallow) influence shallow coseismic slip magnitude? Kawamura et al. (2012)

9. … and building on potential insight from geodetic AND seismic AND geologic insight:Could more detailed information about slip behavior help us to link prism structure with mechanical properties of the subduction zone?

10. Seafloor geodetic measurements used to observe interseismic locking behavior at Peru-Chili trench, specific focus is near the trench. Relies on Acoustic-GPS at two stations, in 2001 and 2003 (reoccupying installed benchmarks)Used observations to determine no-slip on the plate interface between 2-40 km depth.Seafloor geodetic measurements used to observe coseismic slip behavior at Japan trench – focus on frontal wedge.Uses pressure sensors (on OBS; drift rate of 0.3 hPa/day) for vertical displacement, and surveying (acoustic ranging; +/- 20 m) of benchmarks. Used observations to determine uplift of 5 m and horizontal displ. Of 60-70 m (+/- 20 m) along frontal wedge.Horizontal displacements compare to acoustic/GPS stations Sato et al. 2011 (error of 50-60 cm) landward – showing ~30 m horizontal displ. – implies large offset along normal fault, and large displacement within shallow fault

11. Gagnon et al. 2005

12. Gagnon et al. 2005The REVEL plate convergence vector (64mmyr at N 82 E) is shownrelative to stable South America. Vector solutions for Nazca convergence, temporary land stations and transponder arrays are shown relative to stable South America through the use of ITRF00 (ref. 25).Models of surface deformation and plate organization. a, Modellng surface deformation: 3D-def model of the surface expression of a no-slip condition between theNazca and South America plates. The onset of the no-slip zone was successively loweredfrom the trench to 10 km depth. Asterisk, model uses the convergence vector from ref. 20.Double asterisk, model uses a steeper dip. b, Plate organization: trench perpendicularprofile from the Nazca to the South America plate around 128 S. Topography combinesmultibeam sonar and satellite altimetry data. Displacement (and 1j errors)perpendicular to the trench relative to stable South America are shown as triangles fortemporary land stations and transponder arrays, and squares for land stations from ref. 8.letters to nature

13. Ito et al., 2011 Time series of observed bottom pressures atTJT1. (top) Bottom pressures from April, 2010 to the endof March, 2011. (bottom) Enlargement of the intervalbetween 7 March and 16 March, 2011. Red lines representobserved bottom pressures after the removal of ocean tideeffects. Relative variations in pressure (hPa) correspond torelative vertical displacements (cm).

14. Ito et al., 2011 Two‐ dimensional fault model in the cross sectionperpendicular to the trench axis. The red line indicatesthe plate boundary assumed in a two‐ dimensional elastichalf‐ space, where the geometry of the plate boundary istaken from seismic reflection and refraction images [Tsujiet al. , 2011]. The surface of the elastic half‐ space dips 6°seaward because of the steep bathymetry around theobservation sites. (b) Comparison between observed andpredicted vertical displacements. (c) Comparison between observed and predicted horizontal displacements. Diamonds indicate the observed displacement; red curves indicate predicted displacements. Error bars around the diamonds indicate the observation error. The predicted displacement was derived from a fitted fault model with slip magnitudes of 80 m, where the updip end of the suitable fault reached the surface. (d) Pre‐ existing seismic structure and observeddeformation of the frontal wedge. The seismic structure ismodified from Tsuji et al. [2011]. Red arrows indicated theobserved displacements at TJT1, TJT2, and GJT3. The redline indicates the fault model estimated in this study.

15. Following slides are possibilities to use to supplement discussion on techniques

16. Burgmann & Chadwell, 2014GPS - AcousticSeafloor Pressure

17. Burgmann & Chadwell, 2014; modified from Fujiwara et al. 2011, Itoet al. 2011, Kodaira et al. 2012Differenced bathymetry

18.

19.

20.

21. Seafloor geodetic measurements of plate motion, mid-ocean ridge spreading, and subduction-related deformation of the Juan de Fucaplate. (a) Map of existing and in-progress measurements. Three GPS-A velocities (red arrows) are compared with geologic plate motionof the Juan de Fuca plate with respect to stable North America (Wilson 1993) (black arrows). Northeast-directed GPS velocities alongthe coast (blue arrows) reflect the broad interseismic elastic strain accumulation across the Cascadia subduction zone (McCaffrey et al.2013). Red and orange squares are recently funded and proposed GPS-A profiles, respectively, across the locked subduction thrust. Redtriangles are existing Ocean Drilling Program boreholes instrumented with formation and seafloor pressure sensors (Davis et al. 2004),and red circles are seafloor pressure sensors, on or near the NEPTUNE Canada cable (red line) (E. Davis, personal communication). Aborehole tiltmeter, seafloor geodetic benchmarks, and a pressure-sensor array (orange circles) are to contribute additional data in realtime via the Canadian cable system (red line) ( J. McGuire, personal communication). Orange triangles mark nodes instrumented withpressure sensors of a new seafloor cable system off Oregon ( green line; Ocean Observatories Initiative Regional Scale Nodes). Purpledots are M >3 earthquakes, dark yellow lines are spreading ridges, and orange lines are oceanic transform faults.Burgmann & Chadwell, 2014

22. Burgmann & Chadwell, 2014